4e Fan Creations and House RulesWorking on variant powers? Statting up a PC race or your version of a monster? Creating or converting an adventure? Put it here!
I've used OpenOffice to create a very rough PDF version of this system, but unfortunately it seems I can't send the file to Stalker0, and I haven't anywhere to put it up myself. Stalker0, if you'll get in touch...
__________________ At the Jersey shore, looking for a 4e game? Click here!
I feel like a jerk for asking but would more/fewer rounds than 3 work fine with a different set of DCs and thresholds? If so, you could always slave away at more simulations and then present among super-advanced options supplementary tables for people who are looking for more/fewer rounds/checks to engage the challenge.
You are a jerk, how dare you insult the perfection of my system!!
Hehe, j/k!!!
When I have time, I'll take a look, I may be able to come up with some guidelines on using a 2 segment system. I won't look at 4 segments, if you want a larger challenge its very easy to put two skill challenges together.
With your example large challenge (Escape from Jail), how much does succeeding or failing at the first section effect the success rate for the third section?
Also If success is worth experience equal to a complexity 5 skill challenge, how would you recommend giving experience for partial success?
One of the things I was pleasantly surprised about when I ran the numbers was how little effect stringing consecutive challenges together was. Generally the +1's and -1's don't swing things too much, approximately +/- 10%.
Quote:
Question: Is it your intent within this system that the normal Aid Another action can be taken? When the enemy is time and not failures it seems like frivolous or cowardly Aid Another would be discouraged but if a party really thinks that it's the better strategy for them, it seems fine with me as long as they realize that's giving up a chance for a success.
In the Obsidian System, aid another is "flavor". When a player describes their actions, they are free to say they are working towards helping another player. However, mechanically its no different, you roll vs the DC for a success. I currently have no intentions of adding aid rules, I am VERY happy to be rid of aid another, as that was the major headache in my last system.
EDIT: Ignore this post now - I removed my .pdf as Stalker has put up his own.
Long story short, I couldn't sleep, so I started converting the WotC 4e FAQ's into .pdf's for myself and figured why not give it a shot for Stalker's Obsidian Skill Challenge System. Four hours later, here you go:
What's different:
I fixed some spelling errors that OpenOffice kept buggin me about, also removed/rewrote the little bits that refered to the document as a forum post, unformatted and reformatted all the text to make headings pop out to the reader a bit more (so there's some difference from the forum posts to .pdf there) and tried to space everything out neatly on the pages. There's gonna be some white space, but oh well. Looks pretty enough to me. Came out to 15 pages.
If you don't want this up here or don't like the format Stalker, let me know and I'll rip it down.
Last edited by ThatDamnNinja; 24th June 2008 at 02:27 AM..
Ooh. Very, very, very nice. The 3 segment system solves the main problem with the core system: that the party becomes its own enemy. Using Action Points for bold recoveries is perfect. There's incentive to use it if it makes the difference between success and failure, but there's even more incentive to succeed without using them at all (and save those Action Points for the next encounter).
Regarding Aid Another: no reason to ban it now. The benefit of granting +2 to someone else's roll is so small that players are usually better off rolling on their own.
One tweak I'm considering is the idea of a "lead character" for certain challenges. This would apply to the captain of the ship, the lead negotiator, the lead researcher, etc. The "lead character" would roll just like any other character, but would count for two successes instead of one. In this scenario, players with bad skill scores might be tempted to aid the lead character, but players with decent skills should roll for themselves.
I assume that if I allowed a "lead character," I would also need to increase required number of successes by two.
Last edited by bardolph; 22nd June 2008 at 03:09 PM..
Long story short, I couldn't sleep, so I started converting the WotC 4e FAQ's into .pdf's for myself and figured why not give it a shot for Stalker's Obsidian Skill Challenge System. Four hours later, here you go:
Looks good, except for one problem. The DC table only has half the entries! Its missing levels 16-30.
I actually just got acrobat myself, so I've been looking into pdf making. I would like to know how you created those headings, and how you got the tables looking so nice. Are you editing the document in acrobat, or is it all in open office and then converted to pdf?
Quote:
Regarding Aid Another: no reason to ban it now. The benefit of granting +2 to someone else's roll is so small that players are usually better off rolling on their own.
In general, using a true "aid another" mechanic with the Obsidian system would be harmful to the players. I am giving up the chance to get a success in order to give my teammates a small bonus. There are very few times when that is worth it, but the players may not know that, and they will shoot themselves in the foot using it.
Or I can create a new easy DC table, create a whole new aid another rule. But I don't want to increase the complexity of the system, the goal here is to create something that is a backdrop to the action, not a forefront. The players are encourage to come up with crazy ways to use their skills, but mechanically they always know what to do.
If the demand for an aid another mechanic is great then I'll look at putting one it. But I cheered when I was able to take it out of this system, and I'm not eager to put it back in.
Quote:
I assume that if I allowed a "lead character," I would also need to increase required number of successes by two.
If your lead guy has a 70% success rate normally, he would gain 2.1 successes more than normal, so increasing the success number by 2 would put you just about right. If the lead guy got a +2 to go to 80%, he would increase his successes to 2.7 over the basic 70%.
Once the core system is to my liking, I will start looking at more advanced options such as these, model them mathematically, and see what comes about, but for right now I think the +2 success with a lead guy is a good starting idea.
I spent a few hours on my trip back from out of state working on a skill challenge replacement, log in... and this looks very interesting indeed. I'm not sure I buy into everything, but between this option and the other you did I'm not sure it makes sense for me to finish mine either.
Also If success is worth experience equal to a complexity 5 skill challenge, how would you recommend giving experience for partial success?
I see this question of yours got missed. Maybe just give a fraction of the XP for partial victory = to the fraction of successes they had relative to the threshold for full success? So for instance a group of 5 needs 8+ for success, with 6 or 7 as partial success. So 75% of XP for 6 successes and 87.5% for 7 successes.
In general, using a true "aid another" mechanic with the Obsidian system would be harmful to the players. I am giving up the chance to get a success in order to give my teammates a small bonus. There are very few times when that is worth it, but the players may not know that, and they will shoot themselves in the foot using it.
With a "lead character" mechanic, it can be useful. I'm actually considering tripling up the swing of the lead character, by granting two points on a success, but -1 on a failure. Aid Another would then amount to a 10% bonus x3, which is a 30% bump on average. Basically, if you need a natural 16 or better to succeed, you're better off rolling Aid Another.
Quote:
If the demand for an aid another mechanic is great then I'll look at putting one it. But I cheered when I was able to take it out of this system, and I'm not eager to put it back in.
I think it depends on the challenge. I think sometimes it is appropriate for one person to be the star, while the other characters assist in various ways. In other cases, a more democratic system works better.
"The Negotiation" is a great example. Having one "face man" doing most of the talking while others chime in to make a stronger case seems right to me, from a roleplaying perspective.
Possible advanced option to emulate the "unlocking" feature of the core and other Stalker0 system without screwing up the probabilities:
Unlocking: Sometimes successful use of a skill will not directly contribute to overcoming the skill challenge but will reveal an especially effective way to do so (e.g. History reveals a precedent that makes a successful Diplomacy check capitalizing on it worth 2 successes).
Under the Obsidian system, Aid Another as a separate mechanic is not worth wasting an attempt to earn a bonafide success, so similarly using one check to simply permit or give a bonus to another isn't usually worthwhile. On the other hand, "unlocking" in the sense proposed above compensates for the effort which cannot produce direct results by enabling a double success. This allows some "gating" by the DM, who may not want, for instance that successful History check to count unless it is subsequently exploited in Intimation/Diplomacy, etc.
This could be generalized into "Aid Another" style attempts where the DM feels the effort is only worthwhile IF it the effort it is supporting is successful.
Of course this is only worth the trouble if the DM doesn't think the skill should even help toward a partial victory without leading to success in another, otherwise the skill should just be treated as any other non-primary.
With your example large challenge (Escape from Jail), how much does succeeding or failing at the first section effect the success rate for the third section?
Also If success is worth experience equal to a complexity 5 skill challenge, how would you recommend giving experience for partial success?
I would give 50% of the XP for a partial success. Personally, I think rating an Obsidian challenge as equal to 5 equal-level monsters is a tad generous (after all, Obsidian has fewer rolls than the core system). However, if it encourages great roleplaying and storytelling, it's completely worth it. The 50% penalty for partial success would pull things down a bit, but in the end I think you would get the same XP overall per game session for Skill Challenges vs combat.
When designing a challenge, consider giving players other side objectives to spend some of their three rolls on.
For example, the Treacherous Forest (Physical Challenge) is known to contain valuable rare plants. If a player makes a successful Nature roll on his turn in the challenge, he doesn't contribute to the party's overall success of the Physical challenge, but finds rare fungi that act like healing potions.
These side quests may force the players to make some interesting choices and add flavour.
"Stop looking at mushrooms and chop, elfling! We need all the help we can get."
I would give 50% of the XP for a partial success. Personally, I think rating an Obsidian challenge as equal to 5 equal-level monsters is a tad generous (after all, Obsidian has fewer rolls than the core system). However, if it encourages great roleplaying and storytelling, it's completely worth it. The 50% penalty for partial success would pull things down a bit, but in the end I think you would get the same XP overall per game session for Skill Challenges vs combat.
Actually Obsidian has more rolls A complexity 5 core challenge will have anywhere from 6 to 17 rolls, where Obsidian always has 15 for a 5 player party, and still 12 for a 4 person.
I'll be honest, I've never used rules to give XP, I've always given out a certain amount each session in games I've run, so I'm open to advice about xp. However, my initial thought was that partial challenges should give full xp. The party still overcame the challenge, they still had an encounter, so they should get the xp for that trouble.
I mean if you have a combat and some of the monsters run away, you still beat the challenge and get the full xp by the book (right?).
So my group got to playtest the Obsidian system, and my DM decided to put it through the ringer. We had 5 skill challenges tonight, all of different shapes and sizes.
The first one was a Mental Challenge were my wizard and our party's warlock did some research on the big bad guy we are looking for. We rolled very well and got a victory, finding out lots of information about him.
The second was a social challenge. The party's cleric and rogue were looking for a stolen object, and found a disreputable looking guy they thought might have a clue. They failed the challenge, and so the guy led them alright, towards a trap. The cleric used his insight and noticed something was up, so the two entered a mental challenge, using insight and perception to watch for when the guy might turn on them. They got a partial success, so they were still led into the trap but were able to prepare before it was sprung. They finished with a physical challenge to run from the thieves. They got a total success using stealth, endurance, and athletics and were able to escape.
Later we all got together again and went into a mental/social challenge to find out where the big bad guy's hideout was in the bad part of town was. It came down to the wire, a few action points were used and it was down to the last roll. We had a partial victory with 7 successes, and the warlock missed. He rerolled with an action point but still failed, so we were able to find the hideout and get there, but the Big Bad knew we were coming.
All in all I was extremely happy with how things worked out. People started out in the "mechanical" mindframe they had gotten used to, but as things went on people started role-playing more and just going with it. People were using the primary skills a lot, even when they weren't their best skills. The cleric even got a critical success on a nature check, and its one of his worst skills!
Also, the three phases helped to move the story along. In the first phase I was working with one party member, by the third we all had moved around and were working with different group members and using different skills. It also allowed the DM to disseminate information in pieces as we gained successes.
The one thing I was worried about was the DC. As a player, 18 felt high to me. I was heartbroken when my buddies would get a 17 and found out they failed. But looking at the results everything came out as expected, we had 1 failure, 2 partials, and 2 totals....right about what I expected.
Actually Obsidian has more rolls A complexity 5 core challenge will have anywhere from 6 to 17 rolls, where Obsidian always has 15 for a 5 player party, and still 12 for a 4 person.
Hmm, I s'pose you're right. I was taking into consideration "pass" rolls like Aid Another, but still... seems like Obsidian has plenty of rolls.
Quote:
I'll be honest, I've never used rules to give XP, I've always given out a certain amount each session in games I've run, so I'm open to advice about xp. However, my initial thought was that partial challenges should give full xp. The party still overcame the challenge, they still had an encounter, so they should get the xp for that trouble.
I mean if you have a combat and some of the monsters run away, you still beat the challenge and get the full xp by the book (right?).
You have a good point. As long as there's some kind of reward for total success (bonuses on future encounters, etc), it makes sense to give full XP for partial success.
This looks really neat. I'm starting a new campaign tonight, and I'm definitely going to be working both of your skill challenge systems into the early sessions, so my group can figure out which they like better, and so I can provide some feedback on Obsidian. Thanks for all the hard work!
First of all, just some general info. What's your party's level, what type of challenge did you do, what kinds of bonuses does your party have. Of large importance, what skills did you allow?
The main information is how does the system work in the party's hands. Did they understand the rules, did they feel comfortable using the system. Did it encourage them to act out and roleplay, or did it feel too "mechanical".
I should have between one and three sessions this next weekend with levels ranging between 1 and 5. I'll make certain to feature the system.
Ok, I've dug into this a little more and me likely. It seems to fulfill the skill challenge spirit (allow for a meaningful skill based encounter with some sense of urgency) while fixing the largest errors of the RAW (better to aid another or not participate if you have low scores or can't think of a way to use your high scores, bad success rate math, etc.).
It even seems flexible enough to handle a few different styles. For instance, I run skill challenges pretty loose, hoping that players will get creative and find appropriate ways to use a variety of skills.
I did a little back of the envelope math, and seems like your system would be fine with the assumptions:
1) 4 person party
2) in general 2-3 characters have appropriate skills, and 1-2 have none
3) the 1-2 with none, will figure out a creative way to use their non-appropriate skills 1-2 times each during the 3 segments (thus getting a few more high skill rolls and having fun being creative)
4) even if 3 doesn't always happen, the group still has a decent (default) chance of success
This is great!
The only part I'm struggling with now is b/c of the fixed 3 segments and victory conditions, it is a bit harder to introduce variety without taking some time to string a few challenges together, create some specific conditions within the challenge, etc.
It would be amazing to get challenge tables for 2, 3, 4 segment challenges with appropriate victory successes for default 70% victory, and a table showing variations in success rate as you vary the # of successes for failure.
Hey guys, I finalized my own pdf version of the system. Its so much cleaner and easier to read then the forum. Take a look, let me know if you find any errors.
LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-fan-creations-house-rules/232340-stalker0s-obsidian-skill-challenge-system-update-version-1-1-now-pdf.html
but would more/fewer rounds than 3 work fine with a different set of DCs and thresholds? If so, you could always slave away at more simulations and then present among super-advanced options supplementary tables for people who are looking for more/fewer rounds/checks to engage the challenge.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
